On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:01:51 +0200
Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it> wrote:
> >>>> Also, doesn't
> >>>> BLD allow the range and domain of # to be much larger than OWL-DL does for type?
> >>> That has already been taken care of by the restrictions imposed by RIF/OWL-DL
> >>> combo.
> >> Such restrictions are currently not there, but they could be added.
> >
> > My understanding is that the restrictions are there
> > for ...[rdfs:subclassOf->...] and we simply need to re-use them for ##.
>
> Well, not for subclassof (this plays no role in RIF-OWL DL
> compatibility), but it is there for rdf:type.
yes. I keep sliding into that rdfs:subclassOf heresy :-)